I know

should be interesting off the field anyway

I understand the problem, I was just pointing out the other side of the argument.

Kear took us on a good cup run but we had an inconsistant league season, yet we still came 5th. In 2006 he got sacked after 3 defeats in 8 (not sure if that figure includes the Bradford cup game though).

Sharp had a fantastic 2006, but slow start in 2007. He turned us around and we came 4th (but 5th best in the league due to Wigans deducted 2 points). He was then sacked despite a 'nightmare' injury situation.

Agar takes over and despite taking us to the cup final (a win against a very poor Bradford that day, but an unusual good attacking performance in the semi) he makes us worse in the league. He starts off the season good but its obvious that it papers over the cracks with a run of 2 wins in 11 and by the time we play at home next, it will be nearly 4 months without a home win.

So the point I'm making?
Despite inconsistances, Kear and Sharp proved that they could get good rugby from the players yet they were sacked. The majority of the players in the current squad played under one or both. So Agar has no excuse for not getting better from his players. He has proved that the majority of the time, he cant get the best from his players, far from it. Very rarely have we got a performance that is on par with how well the players can actually do.
Sharp had tons of players injured, yet he got sacked. It can not be used as a defence from the board as a reason as to why we are doing poor now.
The question I have, and obviously alot of other fans now have, is why is Agar still in the job when his predessors (sp) have done better than him yet found themselves out the job? I actually agreed with the decisions to sack Agar and Sharp before, albeit Sharps sacking came a little too late for my liking. There is no excuse as to why he is in the job still. He has players good enough to not be playing so poorly, they have proved it before. He is an awful head coach and the board, for once, need to spend money on a fantastic coach. In the long term it will save them money from sacking other coaches, plus more fans will go to games and I'm sure sponsorship would go up to as a result

Top Post

I think the main reason he has not been sacked is obvious.

1, He is cheap
2, There is no relegation
3, He is cheap
etc etc

Yup

I'm not sure the club would appoint sharp as the full time coach TBH. Interim certainly but I actually think they may take more time to make a reasoned choice next time. Or maybe they're as stupid as we all think they are

It'll be the latter.

Kear and Sharp weren't good enough yet they gave the job to their understudy, intersting. Someone like Ian Millward is needed to shake this club up before it's too late.

Like he did at wigan?

He was undercover at Wigan



Just think we need someone with a bit carisma. You can see why the players don't look interested if Agars press conferences are anything to go by.

Tim Sheens under pressure to keep his job at West Tigers,what a catch he would be,but he would cost plenty.

Bump!

Paul M; "If relegation was an issue, would your opinion be different?"

My point for last 10 years -we can pay our coach what we like .......but a board made up of non Hull born bred Hull fans etc WILL NOT stump up the cash as it comes out of their profits each year.

A board of true Hull fans would be happy to break even each year as long as we were competitive.

Mike Ashley at Newcastle expected to lose £20 million a year from his own pocket but wanted success ........our board want success but not at risk to their profits and loan repayments.

Hate to put a dampner on it, but what happened to Newcastle again?

He managed to squeeze 2 decades worth of planned losses into a year and a bit? (and is deeply unpopular with the fans)

So to be a true hull fan you have to give the club money for no return?
Why should you expect board members to be well out pocket and put the club at risk by not fulfilling their loan payments?
The profits you're talking about are paltry (£165k last year).

As to Ashleys finances, a £20M loss is nothing to this guy as he lost a £1/3Billion on one lot of shares last year alone. The £20M loss can be offset against any profit his businesses make (and against those in the future) this hardly applies to the board at Hull FC and to be honest I think there aren't any Hull FC fans able or willing to put a few million into the club

So to be a true hull fan you have to give the club money for no return?
Why should you expect board members to be well out pocket and put the club at risk by not fulfilling their loan payments?
The profits you're talking about are paltry (£165k last year).

to be honest I think there aren't :1u6tfzmtany

There are NO local businessmen prepared or maybe able to put their ££ in.
So we have what we have - a board focused on profit and getting their loans back with juicy interest - fair do BUT don't complain if you don't like the fact they pay coaches peanuts etc.
I complain because I would love a Hull board of local men with enough £ to pay a Tim Sheens £300,000 pa to coach Hull FC

Obviously, but what's the point in that question as there is no relegation.

Either way I still feel we need a complete change in our coaching setup but it's not going to happen.

Would you be happy with the said board quadrupling our debt within 3 years to try and sustain a shot at the league.(most people when ploughing money into a business would usually make that as personal loan even if they are a fan. Obviously everyone wants a fan to be in charge of the club but this club has been so close to not existing in the past by trying to chase a dream.And also by complaining your not going to make the chance of local business taking over anymore of a reality in fact I would say these people may just think heck if I buy the club I could be turning into the anti-crist type figure unless I splash all my money

I have heard that there is a group that are interested and have tried to buy the club previously before being stiffed on the deal.

Does one of them groups include a certain agent thats owns a few of our players?

Not the one I know of as far as I know.

A good coach MIGHT be able to transform the on-the-field fortunes of the club for a short time. But for genuine positive change to occur and - more importantly - PREVAIL you need things right upstairs. If you have muppets at the top even Wayne Bennett would struggle past a second year.

Saints are extremely fortunate in having McManus. He's not in the David Whelan wealth bracket, but he has a few bob. Enough to clear the mountain of bad debts and bad faith left behind by the previous administration, which threatened to send Saints the same way as Widnes, Halifax and the rest. McManus has got the club off life-support, single-handedly driven the development of the new stadium through (ready some time in 2011 and owned by the club) and has financed the acquisition of world class talent (Gidley, Lyon, Cayless, Soliola etc.) without running up mind-boggling debt (as was the case with Newlove, Sculthorpe etc.).

But where McManus has REALLY delivered is in creating a comprehensive and cohesive strategy for Success at all levels. From the kit man through to the chairman - everyone understands his role within the machine and what the 'Big Picture' really is. No where is this more important than in the field of junior development. For years St. Helens was a laughing stock. Before Graham we hadn't produced a single top class prop in my living memory (excluding Andy Platt, who didn't come through the ranks as such). Now we have several excellent prospects following Graham (Clough may gravitate toward prop but at this moment he is an excellent young second row). In other positions we're practically awash with talent - Lomax, Ashurst, Eastmond, Wheeler, Ellis etc.

McManus hired the best people to develop the kids (special mention to Mike Rush, who has attracted interest from the RFL to become a national performance manager) and let them get on with it - provided they worked within the framework he developed to take the club forward.

Of course, none of the above guarantees success. Only a fool thinks his club will be at the top forever. But it DOES mean the club should - barring serious ill fortune (such as McManus keeling over dead and a lunatic like Maurice "Spend...Spend...Spend...and the banks be damned!" Lindsay taking over to run the club into the ground) - remain at the very least COMPETITIVE. And that's good enough even for the most fickle fans.